• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Douglas X-3 Stiletto X

L

lazarus

Charter Member
https://drive.google.com/open?id=18v_IYGhV7bRa-G_XHmTpIWs3DpGlA0wb
View attachment 57345View attachment 57346View attachment 57347

It's 'ol masa Ito-Sans from the 2002 days, so remember, it's geriatric.
X materials and animation deffs, VC model, textures assigned in DDS. Considering it's age, the lawn dart isn't too bad.
Be great for old Edwards AI, and there's a dearth of X ships for the sim. I did some basic geometry massaging to get things matched up with the visual model- by eye, so, not perfect, but better. Mike Pooks cockpit cfg, Hetzie has a 2D set made over at sinviation. Put in and adjusted the flight tuning, the numbers aren't way out of whack. Very long take offs run and landing run out at high speeds - around 160-170 kts, its easy to get into a high sinkrate and jam your pud in the dirt.
Have not got 'round to doing anything with the effects set yet. Frames are fantastic, looks allright.
It's not a Milton plane; sorry, Pam. But it'll fill the hole until somebody takes the bit. Good fun, though!
 
I remember seeing pics of this thing as a rug-rat....and always thought it was the bee's knees .... even if the reality was less stellar...;)
 
Ah, the aircraft that vidicated the Starfighter's concept of pointiness with as little lifting surface as possible. But unlike the Widowmaker, it didn't have the power to go with it.
 
I've never been able to decide if it's pretty or freakish. Probably one of the last machines ever designed with the little tiny traditional vertical stab, this thing must have hunted in yaw some terrible. They did get a grip on inertia coupling out of it, and learned what not to do. It seemed kind of a retrograde step after the sky streak and sky rocket, which looked right and flew right. I guess you could call it successful. They only built the one, and it didn't convert into a smoking hole, so win.
Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?
 
Thanks Lazarus.. I Downloaded this the other day and although i had to make a couple adjustments to the fde because of my oversensitive joystick, it flew all right.. I was surprised when i saw that Ito-Sama had factored in Coupled MOI, which is a lot of what the plane was designed to explore.. Coupled MOI is kind of the witches brew of aviation. Mostly in FSX and P3D you wont see it, and old experienced FDE engineers will tell you it doesnt matter, but for a long slender body like the X-3 and the manned missile, its quite the pain. Coupled MOI happens when you move through two planes at the same time, which in most aircraft is always if your not flying straight. WWI flic's and the dogfight in Top Gun provide excellent examples of Coupled MOI. As the planes roll and yaw through a turn, youll see the Ennpenage skid outward You'll also see this in the classic wings Sopwith Camel ( because the tail is heavy ). Thats Coupled MOI, and its been known to throw aircraft into unrecoverable situations.. The X-3 was instrumental in finding ways to combat this effect and pioneered new technologies for the time that we now take for granted ( yaw dampers anyone?? ).. Its a good plane, and a fun one.. I'm sorry i got over amped and fired up and hijacked the other thread. Me and my five year old mentality when it kicks in.. It's truly embarrasing, and in this case may have caused people to not care to make the plane.. I just get too excited..
 
lazarus said:
I've never been able to decide if it's pretty or freakish. Probably one of the last machines ever designed with the little tiny traditional vertical stab, this thing must have hunted in yaw some terrible. They did get a grip on inertia coupling out of it, and learned what not to do. It seemed kind of a retrograde step after the sky streak and sky rocket, which looked right and flew right. I guess you could call it successful. They only built the one, and it didn't convert into a smoking hole, so win.
Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?
Click to expand...

I can only guess that being test pilots during that time period, they were expected to not get in a situation where ejection was needed, and if they did, they were expendable.. Hell, men died building the hoover dam and the panama canal, whats one test pilot?? The fifties had major attitude problems..
 
lazarus said:
Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?
Click to expand...

"Flying for the first time in 1952, the X-3 looked weird. The pilot sat in a pressurized cabin on a downwards-firing ejection seat, which also served as an electric lift to provide access from the ground. The X-3 was difficult to handle when taxiing, tricky on take-off and very difficult to fly. "
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Douglas-X3.html
 
I remember sticking together the ancient Lindbergh 1:48 plastic model kit together a lifetime ago!
And I mean 'sticking'.........build 'em fast and out of the box back in the day.
:biggrin-new:
 
Thanks, Bjoern. The recollection came back as soon as I read your post. The door is a carry-over from the lindbergh kit, a battery compartment for the original 'motorized' toy features they were fond of. Boss Ito often modelled models. So it's a good representation of a bad model of the X-3.:biggrin-new:
 
warchild said:
... snipped ... Its a good plane, and a fun one.. I'm sorry i got over amped and fired up and hijacked the other thread. Me and my five year old mentality when it kicks in.. It's truly embarrassing, and in this case may have caused people to not care to make the plane.. I just get too excited..
Click to expand...

Pam,

If you are referring to me or my thread, I was in no way offended or put off; actually was honored by your comments. Thank you :)

I did some web searching and found plenty of info on the X-3 but not a single really good 3-view with cross-sections.
I think cross-sections are essential for getting a good quality model built for this aircraft.
Although there are a few good walk-around pics to be found, its just hard to get a feel for the body/engine mold from what I have seen.

If a good 3-view with cross-sections can be found, I'll take a stab at the model and mapping but would leave sounds, exterior/interior textures, and flight model (i.e. the rest of the project) to you/others. Panel proper gauges I do not have in my inventory although I could populate with some functional ones.
 
Mr. Shupe, you have way too much time on your hands, and a generous streak wide enough to require inner, middle and outer markers!:encouragement:
I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten:biggrin-new:) of some museum coneheads. No promises, though. Sections drawings are hard ones to get. Took me a month of shaking and pistol-whipping to find a set of Seamaster sections.
 
lazarus said:
Mr. Shupe, you have way too much time on your hands, and a generous streak wide enough to require inner, middle and outer markers!:encouragement:
I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten:biggrin-new:) of some museum coneheads. No promises, though. Sections drawings are hard ones to get. Took me a month of shaking and pistol-whipping to find a set of Seamaster sections.
Click to expand...

LOL Well, my "markers" were laid out above so if proper sectional drawings can be found, maybe I can provide a reasonable model acceptable to the interested group.

Thank you
 
000rick000 said:
Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090188.pdf

Contains a 3 view and engineering measurements of the required items for the wing.
Click to expand...

Thank you Rick; that is very helpful for accurate wing layout. I have seen but one picture showing the LE of wing extended I assume to 7 degrees as noted in the doc.

Will need to do some study to determine how the main gear retracts.

Found 3 decent pics of the cockpit that were quite helpful.
 
Milton Shupe said:
Pam,

If you are referring to me or my thread, I was in no way offended or put off; actually was honored by your comments. Thank you :)

I did some web searching and found plenty of info on the X-3 but not a single really good 3-view with cross-sections.
I think cross-sections are essential for getting a good quality model built for this aircraft.
Although there are a few good walk-around pics to be found, its just hard to get a feel for the body/engine mold from what I have seen.

If a good 3-view with cross-sections can be found, I'll take a stab at the model and mapping but would leave sounds, exterior/interior textures, and flight model (i.e. the rest of the project) to you/others. Panel proper gauges I do not have in my inventory although I could populate with some functional ones.
Click to expand...

Milton, you are far too kind. I mean that sincerely. Your words honor me as well.. I believe i got lucky. I found a drawing of the quality i usually use when making FDE's. I hope it's of some use too you :)..
Pam

X-3_Stiletto_3_view_diagram_WIKI-EN_NASA.png
 
warchild said:
Milton, you are far too kind. I mean that sincerely. Your words honor me as well.. I believe i got lucky. I found a drawing of the quality i usually use when making FDE's. I hope it's of some use too you :)..
Pam
Click to expand...

Thanks Pam; I have that one and a few others, but none that show cross section drawings that are essential for getting the fuselage shaped correctly at various points. That is key for an aircraft like this one.

Attached is a crude example of cross sections for the Beech D18. This was part of a larger 3-view drawing where the cross sections are identified at locations along the side view.
 

Attachments

  • b18cross (Small).JPG
    b18cross (Small).JPG
    12.3 KB · Views: 2
000rick000 said:
Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090188.pdf

Contains a 3 view and engineering measurements of the required items for the wing.
Click to expand...

My Gods where did you find that?? I used to spend weeks trying to find stuff like that. Inncredible.. Thank you.. Alll those figures and formulas they give you culminates in the final design of the aircraft, and in essence, the airfile. It doesnt have power plants but thats less important.. Thanks for digging that up..
Pam
 
warchild said:
My Gods where did you find that?? I used to spend weeks trying to find stuff like that. Inncredible.. Thank you.. Alll those figures and formulas they give you culminates in the final design of the aircraft, and in essence, the airfile. It doesnt have power plants but thats less important.. Thanks for digging that up..
Pam
Click to expand...

Rick is great when seeking this stuff out. You should see the data collection for the xf-92A project. :)
 
Milton Shupe said:
Thanks Pam; I have that one and a few others, but none that show cross section drawings that are essential for getting the fuselage shaped correctly at various points. That is key for an aircraft like this one.

Attached is a crude example of cross sections for the Beech D18. This was part of a larger 3-view drawing where the cross sections are identified at locations along the side view.
Click to expand...

I understand.. The predominantly square body and the round nose is a difficult transition without the cross sections.. I'm afraid i havent been able to find any either.. Perhaps in time someone can dig something up.. We can always hope.. Thank you. :)
Pam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top